Let’s look at it from a different perspective, nothing to do with Koufax or Maddux specifically.
Starting pitchers in 1990s, of whom Maddux was one of the best, are simply less valuable than their counterparts in the 1960s. I haven’t checked but I’d be amazed if Win Shares for starting pitchers were close to equal in both eras. Win Shares would be a good measure, because the number of games won by teams remained constant, but relievers (both closers and middle relief guys) would be getting WS as they became more prominent. Now, who do you suppose they would be taking their newfound win shares away from?
Not the hitters. Not the fielders. Not the hot dog vendors.
The best starting pitchers win fewer games, and are less valuable than their 1960s equivalents.
They may earn more career Win Shares total, because they were taken better care of, but of course that doesn’t affect their peak seasons, which will tend to have fewer IP, fewer CG, etc. Is it possible that 1990s pitchers in general could have pitched as much and as well as 1960s pitchers? Sure, it’s possible. But the 1960s guys actually did it, and most of them paid the price in terms of their career lengths.
I don’t mind the claims that 1990s SPs are able to pitch effectively for far longer, but they simply weren’t asked to pitch as much and don’t get brownie points for pitching less.
I’ll go look up Win Shares for you, if you’re interested.
75 games, 73 starts, 73 complete games, 59 wins and 12 losses*. Oh, and a 1.38 ERA, lower than Koufax ever managed (or Maddux for that matter, though Maddux got closer). Koufax never even started 1/3 of his team’s games. Charles Radbourne pitched more than 3/5 of his. Koufax was clearly a weakling.
What, are you going to protest that it was a different era? Shall we then consider each pitcher’s performance in the context of his league?
I’m not sure how you pitch 73 complete games and only get 71 decisions, either. I guess 2 of his games ended in ties. (As did two of his team’s games, which at least is consistent).
What I’ve turned up is what I thought I’d turn up. In Koufax’s three best seasons ('63, '65, and '66), he accrued 100 Win Shares. In Maddux’s three best years ( '95, '92, and '94) his total was 83. As you add years, of course, they grow closer together, and eventually Maddux laps him, but I’ve never suggested otherwise. I have no question Koufax was more valuable at his peak than Maddux was, and I can’t quite understand why you would keep insisting otherwise in the face of all this evidence.
Here’s the source of my Maddux Win Share stats from a blogger who argues that Clemens is more impressive than Maddux, which I’m not at all sure I buy.
Your position is understandable. I personally don’t dock latter-day pitchers credit merely because they pitched in a much-higher offensive era, something completely out of their control. I am sure Maddux could have thrown as many innings as Koufax did-probably more, because he often had a low pitches/batter ratio (80 pitch complete games, several of which I scored during his prime). You can claim greater value for the higher-inning pitcher if you like, ignoring all other factors which may influence said totals, and I won’t complain, but it isn’t the only valid way of looking at this issue. And yes I know about how Win Shares is based strictly on wins, and hence opportunities (PAs/innings), but I’m not sure you can use them effectively for cross-era comparisons, for this, and other, reasons.
I’m not sure how to balance Koufax’s K’s (which are virtually guaranteed outs), vs. the easy comebackers that Maddux often got. We generally credit more value to the high-K pitcher, because he doesn’t need as much help from his D (just a catcher who doesn’t drop the ball), but not all other outs are created equal.
If the downward trend of innings/start continues, and even the best pitchers only throw 6 innings/game, do you envision a future where there are no deserving HoF starters anymore, according to your standards? I half-jokingly suggested in another forum that Pedro Martinez may end up being the youngest HoF starter ever elected, for this reason.
And the “getting all the close pitches” is unmeasureable at best, bogus or meaningless at worst (how much game footage of Koufax is there where we can note the close ones he got-he also had his own reputation to allegedly “influence” the umps).
To throw a little extra fire on the Maddux-Koufax debate, you simply can’t disregard Batting and Fielding.
Maddux’s 18 GGs are suspect, but he was one of the best fielding pitchers ever. If he deserved those GGs is besides the point, he was a fabulous, savvy fielder and due to his pitching style he forced himself to field the ball very often. Look at his put out and assist numbers compared to Koufax, it’s a joke.
Batting is also relevant. Koufax was a terrible hitting pitcher and Maddux was one of the best and Maddux was considered one of the very best at sacrificing runners over, often called in to pitch hit for that purpose. With the number of innings and plate appearances these two guys made the Maddux’s 80 points (more if you limit it to their peaks) are notable figures.
It’s silly to blame Maddux for “friendly” strike zones under the presumption that Koufax wasn’t getting similar treatment in his era. All elite pitchers get favorable calls, just like all elite basketball players get to the line. All that’s notable about Maddux is that he pitched in an era where there was ubiquitous TV coverage complete with slow-mo and pitch trackers and sportswriters had 24 hour sports news shows to fill with “controversy”. Koufax got the same treatment, it’s just that people couldn’t be assed to talk about it in their limited time then and it wasn’t fashionable to whine.
That’s bullshit. I’m not the top expert here, but I followed the Braves throughout the '90s and never heard it. (I was a kid at the time.) Google isn’t turning up anything for me in searches like “Greg Maddux” + tired, + pulled, and a few other terms. If this is one of those things everybody knows and you’ve heard so many stories about it, I’m sure you can link to one.
Also, if you are going to make the claim that Koufax’s “peak” is all that matters, can you really continue to discount the fact that he sucked for the first 6 years (HALF!) of his career? How valuable was he between '58 and '60 when he was starting 25 games a year and putting up 8-12 seasons, walking over a 100 guys with a 4.00+ ERA? Maddux was an All Star in his 2nd full season and Cy Young finalist in his 3rd. Koufax didn’t figure things out until his 7th season! If Koufax had peaked right away before blowing out his arm I might buy into the brief but outstanding argument, but he was subpar for several seasons.
OK, I’m a Maddux fan and I never heard this complaint about him. Also, just asked a coworker of mine who follows baseball much more closely and is much more well-informed about the game than I, and he’d never heard it, either. His exact words were “never heard such a thing.”
One of the great things about going to a Braves game in the 90s when Maddux was pitching: you were in and out of the stadium in about 2 hours and 10 minutes.
It’s not all that matters. It is all I’m discussing, though, in dispute of someone’s claim upthread that Maddux had a better peak. What, you want to claim his best season was better than Koufax’s best, his second best etc., and that he was a better golfer, and a better bartender and better in bed besides? Why can’t you just concede that Koufax was more impressive at his peak, that his peak was far shorter than Maddux’s, and that Maddux was far more valuable over the course of his long career? Then we can all go home.
Marley: See Hawkeyeop’s post above, where he concedes that Maddux asked out of some games:
And let’s look at some of those stats that he’s dazzling us with: he cites 1994-5, two seasons in which Maddux scored huge points with him by starting 53 games and averaging 8 IP per start, completing the astonishing total of 20 starts over those two years. Again, Koufax had more complete games in his two best years than Maddux had starts. I don’t see where I’m supposed to roll over and concede all the stamina points to Maddux here. When Koufax is criticized for health problems, his 1964 season is often mentioned, when he missed more than a third of the season due to elbow problems, but he still had more IP, more BFP, and averaged more wins than Maddux–in an off year, wracked with injuries. I could make the case that if Koufax could have been rested like Maddux was, and limited to pitching 25 starts per year, he might have been injured a lot les, though the Didgers wouldn’t have won the 3 World Series that they won with him as their star player.
How many Series did Maddux help the Braves to win in his much longer career, with far more stars surrounding him? I forget. Do World Championships, and winning the Series MVP count as a plus or minus in your reckoning?
He does not say Maddux ever asked out of a game, which is at the heart of your story - just that late in his career, he got the hook early in some games. Which I agree did happen.
Maddux was a solid pitcher . His average for 162 games was 16 wins and 10 losses. Most he ever won was 20. He did not dominate but was a solid pitcher for 20 years.
One of your cites specifically says Maddux didn’t beg out of games, just that he lacked endurance. The Daily News piece, which like the baseballmusings cite dates from 2003, when Maddux was 37, and it’s also not clear that Robinson (a Mets TV announcer) thinks Maddux ever begged out of a game either. Can’t you at least find a column by a baseball beat writer about this?
At what point in Maddux’s career was he facing more batters per game than Koufax? His entire career was during an era when pitchers were not expected to throw 9 IP per game, and few did. The fact that Maddux became notorious for begging out of games in which he had thrown very few pitches came about because he was ridiculous in this tendency late in his career (or maybe it’s just that Internet cites are more easily found in the 2000s than the 1990s) , but even at his most durable he was leaving games earlier than Koufax, while pitching fewer games per season. I don’t even understand why you’re arguing this point anymore. A durable season for Maddux would be a so-so disappointing season for Koufax. He just had many more of them, is all.
Can’t you at least admit that I didn’t make this up? Maddux has a documented reputation for begging out of games. If you won’t concede that from those three cites, you won’t buy from three hundred, which is about how many times I read it and heard it.
Well, you are quoting sources for when Maddux was in his late thirties. How many pitches did Koufax throw in his late thirties? I’m having trouble with your math 0 > 80
No problem- I didn’t accuse you of making it up, and I never thought you invented it. I thought it was an odd accusation that I’d never heard before, and I still don’t think it’s being supported by much of anything.
If the 300 cites are of that caliber - two forum posts and an offhand comment from one Mets TV guy, at least one of which says the opposite of what you said - you’re correct, I’m never going to be convinced. You might convince me that critics sometimes accused Maddux of doing that, but with those cites, you wouldn’t convince me he’d actually earned the reputation. You could convince me he had a documented reputation using actual documentation. If you wanted to convince me he actually did this, I’d probably want to see multiple columns or something.
All that said, if I needed a pitcher for one game, I’d probably go with peak Koufax over peak Maddux.